DIY History | Transcribe | Hevelin Fanzines | Fandango, v. 2, issue 4, whole no. 8, Spring 1945

Transcribe
Translate

Fandango, v. 2, issue 4, whole no. 8, Spring 1945

Back cover

tice I used--"Young Washington"--may have been offensive, but they had a noticeable counterpart in our last national presidential election! The Cosmic Circle is a dead issue, so...."Young" Washington is dead; long live old man Mulli wups! WASHINGTON! Hope there are no more hard feelings, Raymond.
**************

TO LANGLEY SEARLES: I'm through feuding with you. Your threat of legal action against me forced me to print an unpalatible   withdrawal of my statements about you in Acolyte. I frankly don't wish to take any further risks along this line. Further, I question very strongly if either of us can ever convince the other of his motives, or get the other to see his side of the question unless perhaps from an academic point of view. We have both expressed ourselves quite fully; so far as I'm concerned the matter is a closed issue.
Except for a couple of points. Searles states on p 4 of "Devil Take the Hindmost" that I intended to copy his bibliography, and that he has a letter to that effect from me in his files. I should like to point out that there has never been any intention on my part of lifting Searles' work in whole or in part. The carton of this letter to Smith was written at the same time (as shown by the dates on both letters) as my letter to Searles anent collaboration. Smith (as director and coordinator of the "Great Bib") receiveda copy of my letter to Searles, and Searles to save me some typing ) got a copy of my letter to Smith. I had, for one reason and another, assumed Searles would welcome this collaboration, and expected that the collaboration would use Searles' previous work. About all I did that might seem off color here is to leap to conclusions as to the amount of collaboration Searles and I would do. Come, come; you do not think that if I were intending to steal your work I would send you written evidence of this intention? Also, I should like to point out that there seemed no valid reason to drag go-editor Russell into the feud by refusing to send Acolyte to Searles, and this is what ALS is referring to when he says I renigged on the boycott.
Along this line of boycotting and the like, I want to say that I deeply regret the feud between ALS and FTL, and hope that it can eventually be worked out so that we can continue our activities in the same or similar fields without further explosions from either of us directed at the other. I question if we could ever become real friends--there are too many diverse points at which our personalities would always clash--but at least I hope that we can refrain from further open war. I think my withdrawing from active FAPA participation will tend toward this end; further attempts at censorship, for instance, will be ignored by me completely, since I no longer intend to have any further active connections with the group.
***************

TO THE FUTURIANS: I hope that your attempts to wreck FAPA will meet with the failure that they deserve, and that your group of traitors--Vanguard APA--meets with the ignominious end it deserves. The duly elected officers of FAPA found they could not run the group into the ground, so like a bunch of pouting and spoiled brats, the kiddies took their bats and balls and broke up the game. Any other interpretation makes it needful to juggle the facts in the case as they actually happened. I value the friendship of local Vanguard members Perdue, Kepner, Rogers, and Saha far more than I value FAPA or even my principles of right and wrong. If I continue active in FAPA, and speak my mind about the Futurian swine (as I'd be sure to), I am convinced I'd mar or break these four friendships. This is the chief reason I am quitting active participation. To hell with our venal and unprincipled ex-officers!

Saving...

tice I used--"Young Washington"--may have been offensive, but they had a noticeable counterpart in our last national presidential election! The Cosmic Circle is a dead issue, so...."Young" Washington is dead; long live old man Mulli wups! WASHINGTON! Hope there are no more hard feelings, Raymond. ************** TO LANGLEY SEARLES: I'm through feuding with you. Your threat of legal action against me forced me to print an unpalatible withdrawal of my statements about you in Acolyte. I frankly don't wish to take any further risks along this line. Further, I question very strongly if either of us can ever convince the other of his motives, or get the other to see his side of the question unless perhaps from an academic point of view. We have both expressed ourselves quite fully; so far as I'm concerned the matter is a closed issue. Except for a couple of points. Searles states on p 4 of "Devil Take the Hindmost" that I intended to copy his bibliography, and that he has a letter to that effect from me in his files. I should like to point out that there has never been any intention on my part of lifting Searles' work in whole or in part. The carton of this letter to Smith was written at the same time (as shown by the dates on both letters) as my letter to Searles anent collaboration. Smith (as director and coordinator of the "Great Bib") receiveda copy of my letter to Searles, and Searles to save me some typing ) got a copy of my letter to Smith. I had, for one reason and another, assumed Searles would welcome this collaboration, and expected that the collaboration would use Searles' previous work. About all I did that might seem off color here is to leap to conclusions as to the amount of collaboration Searles and I would do. Come, come; you do not think that if I were intending to steal your work I would send you written evidence of this intention? Also, I should like to point out that there seemed no valid reason to drag go-editor Russell into the feud by refusing to send Acolyte to Searles, and this is what ALS is referring to when he says I renigged on the boycott. Along this line of boycotting and the like, I want to say that I deeply regret the feud between ALS and FTL, and hope that it can eventually be worked out so that we can continue our activities in the same or similar fields without further explosions from either of us directed at the other. I question if we could ever become real friends--there are too many diverse points at which our personalities would always clash--but at least I hope that we can refrain from further open war. I think my withdrawing from active FAPA participation will tend toward this end; further attempts at censorship, for instance, will be ignored by me completely, since I no longer intend to have any further active connections with the group. *************** TO THE FUTURIANS: I hope that your attempts to wreck FAPA will meet with the failure that they deserve, and that your group of traitors--Vanguard APA--meets with the ignominious end it deserves. The duly elected officers of FAPA found they could not run the group into the ground, so like a bunch of pouting and spoiled brats, the kiddies took their bats and balls and broke up the game. Any other interpretation makes it needful to juggle the facts in the case as they actually happened. I value the friendship of local Vanguard members Perdue, Kepner, Rogers, and Saha far more than I value FAPA or even my principles of right and wrong. If I continue active in FAPA, and speak my mind about the Futurian swine (as I'd be sure to), I am convinced I'd mar or break these four friendships. This is the chief reason I am quitting active participation. To hell with our venal and unprincipled ex-officers!